Editorial: Scots embraced the value of multiple identities in a global world

In voting the way they did, the pragmatic Scots showed they appreciate the practical value of multiple political identities in our ever-more-globalized world. And it's it says a lot about Canada that the U.K. is now looking at a more federal model to redefine itself.

In the end, it wasn’t the cliffhanger many observers had predicted. Scotland firmly rejected national independence in a historic referendum Thursday that broke voter participation records, with some precincts reporting 100 per cent turnout.

Despite the enthusiasm of the Yes side and a moribund campaign by the No camp, Scots chose to remain part of the United Kingdom by a vote of 55.3 per cent to 44.7 per cent. It was a far more decisive margin than Quebec’s squeaker in 1995, where sovereignists came within about a percentage point of dismantling Canada.

The Scottish result offers clear messages that should echo in Catalonia, Flanders and indeed Quebec, where there are active independence movements.

In deciding to remain part of the United Kingdom, Scots embraced the pragmatic value of multiple identities in a global world. They are Scots, aye, but also Brits and Europeans. Whether they voted Yes or No, Scots possess a strong national identity that is not compromised as part of a larger political union.

The vote shows a majority of Scots see clear advantages in the benefits of open trade, labour mobility and a strong currency — as long as they can govern their own affairs at home. Far from absorbing “fearmongering” from the No forces about economic uncertainty or “caving” in face of the threat that using the British Pound would not be guaranteed in the case of a Yes vote, they made a practical calculation.

In a modern, interconnected world, people are the sum of their various parts. They can identify with more than one group, culture, religion or nationality at the same time. This is the beauty of the modern, democratic nation-state, no matter how tantalizing the dream of severing ties and striking out alone.

Of course, this balance between heart and head, core identities and global citizenship, is only reached when all aspects of the whole are satisfied. Scotland’s referendum came 307 years after it joined the United Kingdom, but 15 years after its own parliament, Holyrood, was re-established.

The referendum result, though, should not be read as a vote in favour of the status quo. The 11th-hour promises of politicians in Westminster to devolve maximum powers to Scotland will likely set off similar demands from Wales and Northern Ireland. A long period of exploring new, more decentralized models is likely on the horizon for the United Kingdom.

Scots also showed that their independence drive was not an ethnic project reserved solely for those with Scottish roots. Scotland, with only 4 per cent of its population composed of minority groups, is not a diverse country in comparison to Canada. Whether because of or in spite of this, a high number of immigrants, adherents of different religions and members of cultural communities took up the cause.

Ethnic nationalism was not an undercurrent of Scotland’s independence campaign, as it was in Quebec in 1995. So long as Quebec’s sovereignty movement remains rooted in identity politics — like the Parti Québécois’s repugnant Charter of Values, resoundingly rejected by voters during last spring’s general election — it is likely to broaden its appeal. Support for Quebec sovereignty is at its lowest point in 40 years, with extensive polling showing young people in particular have abandoned the cause.

But the one lesson from Scotland that must be disheartening for those asking their compatriots to take a leap of faith in Spain, Belgium or Canada is just how hard it is to achieve independence — even amid seemingly “winning conditions.” States that don’t force people to choose between their various identities inspire stronger allegiance than some realize and prove resilient in the face of challenges.

This Week's Flyers

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.